Microsoft Flight Simulator Aerosoft Aircraft - A330 Preview

[Svend Loggerhead 136]

2 hours ago, cwa alt said:

doesnt really make sense to make another engine variant when fslabs is coming out with the a330, albeit that will be some time

I hope Aerosoft atleast makes an expansion pack for the A330ceo with a different engine variant because the two airlines I want to simulate most use the CF6 engines, not the RR

(I can always suck up the slight unrealism if they don’t make a CF6 version but still)

[ahmed2003 110]

2 hours ago, cwa alt said:

i didn't come from the p3d world so i dont know how long it took them to release the a320 family, i assume it took awhile lmao

It took about 6 years to develop their a320 but honestly, It was astonishing. 

[Ewerton_BirdStrike 7]

7 hours ago, Yichi Zhang said:

Nobody ever thought that the next one would be A330-200 ?

2

[dkaper 8]

We can only speculate, but I have a feeling its one of the smaller airbuses. 

[FWAviation 484]

My bet is on other variants of the A330ceo, namely the -200 or at least other engine variants for the -300. I think that their name for the product ("A330ceo") might be a good hint that their A330 development will not stop at the A330-300 with RR engines... So, @Yichi Zhang and @Ewerton_BirdStrike: We are three now.

[TomReborn 429]

Y'all might be getting a bit too carried away, it might not even be an aircraft oooo Mega Airport Frankfurt...now that would be nice!

[Zocopeta 12]

If is an a320, why would you like to fo that when we got the fenix that is study level and is cheap, just i want to know what is your opinion about this. @Mathijs Kok

[The Dude 6537]

34 minutes ago, Zocopeta said:

If is an a320, why would you like to fo that when we got the fenix that is study level and is cheap, just i want to know what is your opinion about this. @Mathijs Kok

Can‘t you just wait till the announcement next week? Or do you also want to know what Mathijs thinks about releasing an hypothetical AS B738 when PMDG already have one?  

[JasonmCork 121]

16 hours ago, Mathijs Kok said:

 

Next week we'll announce the next project

 

Are you sure you want to bring that stress on yourself?

[SpeedbirdSimulation 73]

20 minutes ago, Simone Minetti said:

can we have an indicative amount of time that we need to wait more or less before seeing the A330 released? i know many people asked but i think at this point it’s possible to give some more estimated info

When there is something to be announced be assured we will hear about it.

 

Keep asking probably gets annoying to the development team. As they are hard at work.

[AirbusA380-800 174]

vor 15 Minuten schrieb Simone Minetti:

can we have an indicative amount of time that we need to wait more or less before seeing the A330 released? i know many people asked but i think at this point it’s possible to give some more estimated info

Come on, you said it yourself. It’s been asked and answered a thousand times. We already have an estimated release window + we know we’ll get a two weeks notice. How much more specific do you want AS to be besides literally telling us the date? 

[Alvariteus 127]

15 hours ago, cwa alt said:

we already have toliss, no ones ever made a decent a340-300 for any sim

 

Toliss is not for MSFS. I would love it to be the A340-600, as it would offer ultra-long haul capabilities and it is, at least in terms of size and performance, a bit more different and unique than the difference between the A330-300 and the A340-300. In addition, nobody is working on the A346. Either freeware or payware developers.

 

However, I honestly think they will announce the A340-300 haha! I guess the more natural/easier development for them from the A330-300 base is the A340-300. However, as a customer I would prefer to have the complete A330 family before other long haul aircrafts, with the other different engine options for the -300, and the -200 as well, that could come as an expansion. I would give my wallet to Mathijs and let him take whatever he wants for it

[jason boivin 2]

13 minutes ago, Alvariteus said:

 

Toliss is not for MSFS. I would love it to be the A340-600, as it would offer ultra-long haul capabilities and it is, at least in terms of size and performance, a bit more different and unique than the difference between the A330-300 and the A340-300. In addition, nobody is working on the A346. Either freeware or payware developers.

 

However, I honestly think they will announce the A340-300 haha! I guess the more natural/easier development for them from the A330-300 base is the A340-300. However, as a customer I would prefer to have the complete A330 family before other long haul aircrafts, with the other different engine options for the -300, and the -200 as well, that could come as an expansion. I would give my wallet to Mathijs and let him take whatever he wants for it

ill have to disagree on this, an airbus a350 would be much nicer since it's the new aircraft which will only grow as airlines will retire most of their a340s and other older aircradts, even now (regarding as me as a flyer who only flies real world flights) i can only count 3 airlines that uses the 340, lufthansa, edelweiss and swiss. how can that be fun? Wouldn't be much nicer and cooler to have diversification instead of using the same 3 livries and doing the same flights over and over? Anyway that's my opinion

 

 

[Alvariteus 127]

27 minutes ago, jason boivin said:

ill have to disagree on this, an airbus a350 would be much nicer since it's the new aircraft which will only grow as airlines will retire most of their a340s and other older aircradts, even now (regarding as me as a flyer who only flies real world flights) i can only count 3 airlines that uses the 340, lufthansa, edelweiss and swiss. how can that be fun? Wouldn't be much nicer and cooler to have diversification instead of using the same 3 livries and doing the same flights over and over? Anyway that's my opinion

 

 

 

I agree with you. I prefer the A350. But let's be realistic: that will not happen for a while. A350's avionics are too different and too complex to make a high-fidelity A350 in a serious way. The lack of information and the lack of enough knowledge about the plane that is available to software developers will prevent us to have a good A350 in the short and medium term. This is not something I say, this is something that developers say.

[mopperle 4162]

28 minutes ago, Alvariteus said:

A350's avionics are too different and too complex to make a high-fidelity A350 in a serious way.

That's not the main problem. The problem is simply that the data you need to make a somehow realistic model are not available as in the past. In the past you could get tons of FCOM and other docs as pdf. Now this is gone. All data are "hidden" in electronic devices and these devices are not available to people outside the manufacturer and airline staff. And this staff (pilots, maintenance...) only have access to exact that part of data that is needed to do their job.

[Juho Heikkinen 0]

Hoping for A340-300 for some now historical Finnair ops. But wouldn't be surprised if it's a smaller bus either as there is no competition on the marketplace atm. I don't think AS consider LatinVFR much of a threat to sales

[PilotAT2001 3]

vor 56 Minuten schrieb mopperle:

That's not the main problem. The problem is simply that the data you need to make a somehow realistic model are not available as in the past. In the past you could get tons of FCOM and other docs as pdf. Now this is gone. All data are "hidden" in electronic devices and these devices are not available to people outside the manufacturer and airline staff. And this staff (pilots, maintenance...) only have access to exact that part of data that is needed to do their job.

 

Maybe I get some negative comments like last time, when I mentioned competitors, but there are rumours/ confirmations, that PMDG has quit good connection to Boeing, and they also announced a 777X, so for an study level/ high fidelity 777X, they need for sure help from Boeing to achieve that. So now my question: Does Aerosoft also has good connections to Airbus, or would there be any chance to get much more information for the A350 directly from Airbus? When I interpret the forum right, Aerosoft focus is on building an plane that is focused on the SOP and not simulate every smallest feature, so I would say, that the information Aerosoft would need to build an A350 for SOP already the competitor Boeing has, so from my point of view, it would not harm Airbus at all. I think a A350 would be a plane, that so much customer wants and would love to fly, and no other competitor build. (DFD publish the last post 1 year ago, so not really serious atm) But of course I agree, the logical steps would be an 319/ 321 (XLR)/ A340, the A350 System are new. Or is this wrong, as I already wrote, I don’t know any exact details (maybe AS tried to contact Airbus in the past, …), so let me know.

[Alvariteus 127]

52 minutes ago, mopperle said:

That's not the main problem. The problem is simply that the data you need to make a somehow realistic model are not available as in the past. In the past you could get tons of FCOM and other docs as pdf. Now this is gone. All data are "hidden" in electronic devices and these devices are not available to people outside the manufacturer and airline staff. And this staff (pilots, maintenance...) only have access to exact that part of data that is needed to do their job.

 

That's what I wanted to say but you expressed it much better than me. Thank you!

[mopperle 4162]

22 minutes ago, PilotAT2001 said:

Does Aerosoft also has good connections to Airbus, or would there be any chance to get much more information for the A350 directly from Airbus?

Unfortunately no. They have a very restrictiv company policy which does not allow support for flightsimulation add-ons in any way.

[Aerosoft Team [Inactive Account] 51558]

As there was some time... 

 

Please login to display this image.

 

Please login to display this image.

 

Please login to display this image.

 

Please login to display this image.

 

Please login to display this image.

[Aerosoft Team [Inactive Account] 51558]

41 minutes ago, PilotAT2001 said:

 

Maybe I get some negative comments like last time, when I mentioned competitors, but there are rumours/ confirmations, that PMDG has quit good connection to Boeing, 

 

The kind of information needed will never be shared, it is really a question of experimenting and then letting real pilots test it. 

[Cpt.Ronin 23]

1 hour ago, mopperle said:

That's not the main problem. The problem is simply that the data you need to make a somehow realistic model are not available as in the past. In the past you could get tons of FCOM and other docs as pdf. Now this is gone. All data are "hidden" in electronic devices and these devices are not available to people outside the manufacturer and airline staff. And this staff (pilots, maintenance...) only have access to exact that part of data that is needed to do their job.

I totally agree with this statement. 
Im a certified engineer on the Airbus 350 and the documentation provided is so crap compared to legacy aircraft. It barely skims the essence of how the systems operate and in some cases it’s even lacking certain features. I did my type training with Airbus, and even the Airbus employed instructors struggled to describe certain system logics based on the information given to them. 

[HarryBRZz 19]

1 hour ago, Cpt.Ronin said:

I totally agree with this statement. 
Im a certified engineer on the Airbus 350 and the documentation provided is so crap compared to legacy aircraft. It barely skims the essence of how the systems operate and in some cases it’s even lacking certain features. I did my type training with Airbus, and even the Airbus employed instructors struggled to describe certain system logics based on the information given to them. 

I suppose it will be like that for quite some time into the future too.

[The Dude 6537]

I would say that if you can make a MSFS A333 you can also make an A350 that is somewhat believable. All this talk about ultra realism is partly just PR. There are enough A350 FCOMs floating around on the net. There are also enough videos and pictures to be found. Then you have some pilots that are willing to assist. 
 

The A350, IRL, can also be flown when having an A330 Typerating and doing just a few simulator missions as a RW Pilot. The A350 flight characteristics are closely matched to the A330 because of this. 
 

MSFS add ons do not need to model different internal A350 Network environments, systems and such. If you are just doing normal SOPs you could get a pretty good A350 if you took the A330 code as a baseline. Engine wise there is also not that much of a difference to the Trents except for fuel flow and small parameters that a sim pilot would not notice at all when comparing the two. 

 

I can see that the Airport Navigation Function and BTV would be the biggest differences with the A333 and maybe AS could just switch them inop for the initial release.  

 

Hoping for that A350 in MSFS….
 

 

[ahmed2003 110]

3 hours ago, Mathijs Kok said:

As there was some time... 

 

Please login to display this image.

 

Please login to display this image.

 

Please login to display this image.

 

Please login to display this image.

 

Please login to display this image.

That's it. so amazing appreciating thank you